Skip to main content

Theory and Modern Applications

  • Research Article
  • Open access
  • Published:

Exponential Stability of Two Coupled Second-Order Evolution Equations


By using the multiplier technique, we prove that the energy of a system of two coupled second order evolution equations (one is an integro-differential equation) decays exponentially if the convolution kernel decays exponentially. An example is give to illustrate that the result obtained can be applied to concrete partial differential equations.

1. Introduction

Of concern is the exponential stability of two coupled second-order evolution equations (one is an integro-differential equation) in Hilbert space


with initial data


Here is a positive self-adjoint linear operator, , , is a nonnegative function on . Moreover, the fractional power is defined as in the well known operator theory (cf, e.g., [1, 2]).

An interesting and difficult point for it is to stabilize the whole system via the damping effect given by only one equation (1.1). We remark that there is very few work concerning the situation when the damping mechanism is given by memory terms; see [3], where a coupled Timoshenko beam system is investigated.

On the other hand, the stability of the single integro-differential equation has been studied extensively; see, for instance, [4, 5].

In this paper, through suitably choosing multipliers for the energy together with other techniques, we obtain the desired exponential decay result for the system (1.1)–(1.3). Nonlinear coupled systems with general decay rates will be discussed in a forthcoming paper.

In Section 2, we present our exponential decay theorem and its proof. An application is given in Section 3.

2. Exponential Decay Result

We start with stating our assumptions:

(1) is a self-adjoint linear operator in , satisfying


where .

(2), are constants. is locally absolutely continuous, satisfying


and there exists a positive constant , such that


We define the energy of a mild solution of (1.1)–(1.3) as


The following is our exponential decay theorem.

Theorem 2.1.

Let the assumptions be satisfied. Then,

(i)for any and , problem (1.1)–(1.3) admits a unique mild solution on . The solution is a classical one, if and ,

(ii)there exists a constant such that the energy


for any mild solution of (1.1)–(1.3).


We denote


Then, (1.1)–(1.3) becomes


in . From the assumptions, one sees that— is the generator of a strongly continuous cosine function on , and is bounded from into . Therefore, we justify the assertion (i) (cf., e.g. [6]).

Suppose now that is a classical solution of (1.1)–(1.3). We observe


by Assumption (2) and so




and take . We have


Furthermore, we need the following lemmas.

Lemma 2.2.

For any and for any , there exist positive numbers , such that


for some positive constants which only depend on , , , and .


At first, let us take the inner product of both sides of (1.1) with and integrate over . Then, noticing (1.2), we obtain


For the first item, integrating by parts, we have


The second and the fifth items can be treated similarly. Therefore,


Then, taking the inner product of both sides of (1.1) with and integrating over , we obtain


Equation (2.15)   ×   + (2.16) yields that


Next, we will estimate all the terms on the right side of (2.17). From (2.11), we have the following estimate:


where is a positive constant. Those terms of the form can be similarly treated. Denote by the sum of the other terms on the right of (2.17).

Using Young's inequality and noting (2.8), we get, for ,


The treatment of the other terms of is similar, giving


Thus, we obtain


where . Make use of the estimate


where is a positive constant, small enough to satisfy . We thus verify our conclusion.

Lemma 2.3.

For any and for any , there exist positive numbers , , such that



We denote and take the inner product of both sides of (1.2) with , and integrate over . It follows that


Plugging this equation into (2.16), we find




where , and for


The other items on the right of (2.25) can be dealt with as in the proof of Lemma 2.2. Hence, we get the conclusion.

Lemma 2.4.

For any , there exist positive numbers , such that



Taking the inner product of both sides of (1.2) with and integrating over , we see


Combining this equation and (2.16) gives


This yields the estimate as desired.

Lemma 2.5.

Let be fixed. For any and for any , there exist positive numbers , such that



Take the inner product of both sides of (1.1) with and integrate over . This leads to


Just as in the proofs of the above lemmas, using Young's inequality and noting that


we prove the conclusion.

Proof of Theorem 2.1 (continued).

From Assumption (2) and (2.8), we have


Now, fix . Thanks to Lemmas 2.2 and 2.3, we know that for any and for ,


Moreover, by the use of Lemmas 2.4 and 2.5, we have






Taking small enough gives


Therefore, there is a constant such that


by (2.36). Using Lemma 2.4 and (2.34), we deduce that for some ,


Next, define


It is easy to see that there exist such that . Therefore,


On the other hand, when ,


that is,


By a standard approximation argument, we see that (2.45) is also true for mild solutions. From this integral inequality, we complete the proof (cf., e.g., [7, Theorem 8.1]).

3. An Example

Example 3.1.

Consider a coupled system of Petrovsky equations with a memory term


where is a bounded open domain in , with sufficiently smooth boundary and as in Assumption (2). Let with the usual inner product and norm. Here, we denote by the time derivative of and by the Laplacian of with respect to space variable . Define by


Then, Assumption (1) is satisfied. Therefore, we claim in view of Theorem 2.1 that the energy of the system decays exponentially at infinity.


  1. Xiao T-J, Liang J: The Cauchy Problem for Higher-Order Abstract Differential Equations, Lecture Notes in Mathematics. Volume 1701. Springer, Berlin, Germany; 1998:xii+301.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  2. Yosida K: Functional Analysis, Classics in Mathematics. Springer, Berlin, Germany; 1995:xii+501.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Ammar-Khodja F, Benabdallah A, Muñoz Rivera JE, Racke R: Energy decay for Timoshenko systems of memory type. Journal of Differential Equations 2003,194(1):82-115. 10.1016/S0022-0396(03)00185-2

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Alabau-Boussouira F, Cannarsa P: A general method for proving sharp energy decay rates for memory-dissipative evolution equations. Comptes Rendus de l'Académie des Sciences—Series I. Paris 2009,347(15-16):867-872.

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Alabau-Boussouira F, Cannarsa P, Sforza D: Decay estimates for second order evolution equations with memory. Journal of Functional Analysis 2008,254(5):1342-1372. 10.1016/j.jfa.2007.09.012

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Dafermos CM: An abstract Volterra equation with applications to linear viscoelasticity. Journal of Differential Equations 1970, 7: 554-569. 10.1016/0022-0396(70)90101-4

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Komornik V: Exact Controllability and Stabilization. The Multiplier Method, RAM: Research in Applied Mathematics. Masson, Paris, France; 1994:viii+156.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references


The authors would like to thank the referees for their comments and suggestions. This work was supported partially by the NSF of China (10771202, 11071042), the Research Fund for Shanghai Key Laboratory for Contemporary Applied Mathematics (08DZ2271900) and the Specialized Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education of China (2007035805).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ti-Jun Xiao.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 International License (, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wan, Q., Xiao, TJ. Exponential Stability of Two Coupled Second-Order Evolution Equations. Adv Differ Equ 2011, 879649 (2011).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: